LNG News

I don’t know much about Mk.3 mousetrap, nor what “some” say.
(Is he/she/it a reliable source of information on the subject?)

Ships built in 1970s may still be in good shape for their age, but are unlikely to be very economical, efficient, or able to meet IMO 2030 target.

Two LNG carriers built in the US in 1970s (LNG Gemini and LNG Leo) seen here in layup in Norway:

For my own curiosity, what ships are your referring to?

Well, I guess they are floating strong. Not really going anywhere. I think one is being converted to an FSRU. But I’m speaking of the made in USA ships.

I don’t have access to the data or info, but I heard on the internet that ball ships have less boil off. But ball ships cost more to build.

Sorry, I had the name of this one wrong:

Build year:1978
Builder:General Dynamics Corporation - Quincy Ma, U.s.a.

PS> They have been in layup in Norway since 2017 and in Spain from 2013 without any trading between.

The LNG Leo broke layup in Norway in 2020 as Bering Energy and was towed to El Ferrol, Spain:

She is still there:

LNG Gemini, now Gulf Energy, are still in layup at Avaldsnes in Norway:

“Ball ships”, WTF is that?
I didn’t even know ships had balls???65249

You are living proof of why Standard Maritime English should be taught in Maritime Schools everywhere, incl. in English speaking countries, as discussed in another thread:

And you are living proof that one should stick to his own level of incompetence and not branch out into other areas. People that work on LNG ships regularly refer to them as “ball ships”…maybe perhaps because they have a few bigass ball (another word for sphere) shaped tanks

It may be a common expression in America but that doesn’t make it an acceptable thing in the maritime world. It is NOT used by those who work on this type of LNG Carrier:

In fact they have probably never heard the expressing “ball ship”

The majority of the LNG Carriers in the world today, both presently trading and new order are membrane type. GTT’s Membrane containment system is dominating the market at the moment:

PS> The Moss Rosenberg type containment system has some advantages and are not entirely forgotten:

Oh yes, before I forget; thank you for your good advise. You should do likewise.

Yes, the term “ball ship” is used by those that work on membrane type LNG vessels when referring to Moss Rosenberg Spherical type LNG carrier. Doesn’t that roll of the tongue very well, “Moss Rosenberg Spherical type LNG carrier”?

I think saying “ball ship” is easier and faster. And so do the officers of various nationalities that I’ve heard use the term…all whom were working on a Mk3 membrane type LNG ship.

And from your link: http://www.liquefiedgascarrier.com/

On the basis of Tank Types used gas carriers may be classified as below:
Type ‘A’: Constructed of plain surfaces (prismatic tanks)
Type ‘B’: Spheres
Type ‘C’: Cylindrical pressure vessels

Never heard people call a ship type A; instead they say “membrane ship”. And never heard “Type B” used; instead people call it a “ball ship”. This is non-Americans/

Most people shorten that down to; “Moss type”. Doesn’t that roll of the tongue very well?

Just curious, but what experience do you have on LNG ships.

1 Like

Does it matter? How much experience do you have on LNG ships to question my experience on LNG ships? Because, if you had any experience on LNG ships, you wouldn’t be asking me this question.

Geez, a lot of gas being blown over LNG news…
(There, I had the balls to say it…)


Since you have no experience, I’ll rephrase my question. How many people do you know who’ve sailed on LNG ships?

Pretty presumptuous there, eh? As stated, it appears you can’t read between the lines and haven’t worked LNG…because if you did you wouldn’t make such assertions. But for giggles, asked a few officers of varying nationalities if they knew what a “ball ship” was, and they all did. Ball ship is an alternative, possibly slang, term to call Moss Rosenberg Spherical type LNG ship.

Why don’t you just fill up the gap between the lines? (Just curious)
Unless it is classified “Top Secret”, whatever you are up to on your LNG ship adventures, with “balls”, or otherwise. (the ships I mean)

Here is one that has “balls”:

The AL ZUBARAH arriving in Zeebrugge
Photo: Dirk Neyts (c)

No, just stating the obvious. If you had, you would speak as a professional would. I have friends and acquittances who worked on the Exmar ships, the Energy Transport and Kuwaiti (LPG) Tankers. I worked for the person in charge of building the Energy Transport Tankers. When I was involved with ship construction at HMD in Korea I worked alongside another site team who were building a LNG tanker at HHI and have since built another. For a time, I was part of a steam to LNG-diesel repowering project. At no time did the term “ball ship” ever come up or was used when LNG ships were discussed.

Yes, it was pretty clear what ships you were trying to refer to. I would not be surprised if you came up with that description in hopes others might believe you know more than you really do. If you wish to use that as a slang term, (as you put it) that is up to you. It’s like a non-mariner in a group of mariners referring to a line as a “rope”.

1 Like

OK boomer. This thread isn’t about me. And it most definitely isn’t about you or all the super smart LNG friends you have that never used a slang term…guess ya’ll are just super high brow with 100% formal speaking.

Why did I call it a ball ship? Because other people reading this thread that don’t have your super duper level of expertness would easily understand what a “ball ship” is. Because it has big fucking balls on it for tanks. You, instead, love to be quite the snob and must use esoteric jargon to hoist yourself high upon your pedestal.

Since you are so in the know, did Pasha finish the steam to diesel/lng conversion that was supposed to be done in China (last I heard)? And of course you know that Exmar isn’t running the fleet of LNG that it used to. What’s the gossip on China building LNG ships…and the massive amount of LNG ships on the order books? Will these new builds crash future charter rates?

PS: I’ve been in multiple LNG related classes, and an alternative name the instructors used to “Moss Ships” was ball ships. And the balls were made in South Carolina, the ship via barge. Quite some big balls.

“The spherical tank carriers, also referred to as Moss tankers, have spherical aluminium tanks” https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Main-types-of-LNG-carriers-moss-spherical-tankers-top-and-membrane-tankers-bottom_fig1_223190585

Last I heard the George ll (ex-Reliance) will come out in April. I’ve seen some pictures of her.

Funny, I had the exact same conversation with the group building their LNG Tanker in Korea, and that was awhile back. A lot has to do with the number of terminals supplying the gas keeping up with the number of terminals wanting to receive it, IMO.

The article you linked to doesn’t appear to mention “ball ships”, or “Balls” even once.
Could that be because it is not something that belongs in a professional’s vocabulary??